IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bdr/borrec/1161.html

¿Cuánto tributan efectivamente el consumo, el trabajo y el capital en Colombia? Cálculos con las Cuentas Nacionales base 2015

Author

Listed:
  • Hernán Rincón-Castro

Abstract

A partir de un análisis que no es contable ni financiero sino económico, Rincón-Castro y Delgado-Rojas (2017) calculan para Colombia las tasas efectivas promedio de tributación sobre el consumo y los factores de producción trabajo y capital para el período comprendido entre 1994 y 2016. Para su estudio los autores utilizan las Cuentas Nacionales del DANE bases 1994 y 2005. El objetivo del presente estudio es realizar los mismos cálculos y con la misma metodología para el período 2005-2019, pero con las Cuentas Nacionales base 2015. Los resultados indican que el cambio de base produjo una reducción sustancial de las tasas efectivas del trabajo y del capital. Por ejemplo, para 2016, la tasa efectiva promedio del trabajo se redujo en 3 puntos porcentuales y del capital en 6 puntos porcentuales. ¿Cuál es la explicación? Los cambios de las bases tributarias que introdujo la nueva base de la contabilidad nacional, ya que la metodología de cálculo, las definiciones de las tasas, los parámetros y los supuestos no cambian. Entre 2017 y 2019 se suman los efectos de las leyes de reforma tributaria 819 de 2016 y 1943 de 2018. Los cálculos para 2019 indican que la tasa efectiva promedio de tributación del consumo es 12,7%, del trabajo es 18% y del capital es 15%. La desagregación de la tasa del trabajo muestra que la tasa de los salarios es 2,3%, de la nómina es 2,7% y de la seguridad social es 13%. La desagregación de la tasa del capital muestra que la de los hogares, quienes son los dueños del capital, es 3,8%, mientras que la de las sociedades es 21,1%. Así, los impuestos en Colombia no son efectivamente tan altos, pero tampoco tan bajos ni tan bien repartidos. **** ABSTRACT: From an analysis that is neither accounting nor financial but economic, Rincón-Castro and Delgado-Rojas (2017) calculate for Colombia the average effective rates of taxation on consumption and the factors of production labor and capital, for the period between 1994 and 2016. They use the National Accounts of DANE bases 1994 and 2005. The objective of this study is to perform the same calculations and with the same methodology for the period 2005-2019, but with the National Accounts base 2015. The results indicate that the change in the base produced a substantial reduction in the effective rates on labor and capital. For example, for 2016, the average effective rate on labor decreased by 3 percentage points and on equity by 6 percentage points. What is the explanation? The changes in the tax bases introduced by the new national accounting base, since the calculation methodology, the definitions of the rates, the parameters and the assumptions do not change. Between 2017 and 2019, the effects of the tax reform law 819 of 2016 and 1943 of 2018 are added. The calculations for 2019 indicate that the average effective tax rate on consumption is 12.7%, on work it is 18% and on capital it is 15%. The breakdown of the rate on work shows that on wages is 2.3%, that of payroll 2.7% and social security 13%. The breakdown of the capital rate shows that, that of households, who are the owners of capital, is 3.8%, while that of corporations is 21.1%. Thus, taxes in Colombia are not actually as high, but neither are they as low or as well distributed.

Suggested Citation

  • Hernán Rincón-Castro, 2021. "¿Cuánto tributan efectivamente el consumo, el trabajo y el capital en Colombia? Cálculos con las Cuentas Nacionales base 2015," Borradores de Economia 1161, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
  • Handle: RePEc:bdr:borrec:1161
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.32468/be.1161
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.32468/be.1161
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/https://doi.org/10.32468/be.1161?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mendoza, Enrique G. & Razin, Assaf & Tesar, Linda L., 1994. "Effective tax rates in macroeconomics: Cross-country estimates of tax rates on factor incomes and consumption," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 297-323, December.
    2. Hernán Rincón-Castro & Martha Elena Delgado-Rojas, 2017. "¿Cuánto tributan efectivamente el consumo, el trabajo y el capital en Colombia?," Coyuntura Económica, Fedesarrollo, vol. 47(1 y 2), pages 97-135.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andres García-Suaza & Fernando Jaramillo & Marlon Salazar, 2023. "Tax policies, informality, and real wage rigidities," Documentos de Trabajo 20744, Universidad del Rosario.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    2. Martin Iseringhausen & Hauke Vierke, 2019. "What Drives Output Volatility? The Role of Demographics and Government Size Revisited," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 81(4), pages 849-867, August.
    3. Hamza Polattimur, 2013. "Housing, Collateral Constraints, and Fiscal Policy," Ekonomi-tek - International Economics Journal, Turkish Economic Association, vol. 2(2), pages 53-82, May.
    4. Michael P. Devereux, 2003. "Measuring Taxes on Income from Capital," CESifo Working Paper Series 962, CESifo.
    5. Shatalovа, Svetlana (Шаталова, Светлана) & Korytin, Andrey (Корытин, Андрей) & Zakharenkova, Elena (Захаренкова, Елена), 2017. "Analysis of Approaches to Determining the Level of Tax Burden [Анализ Подходов К Определению Уровня Налоговой Нагрузки В Экономике]," Working Papers 041704, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    6. Nukic, Senada, 2014. "Fiscal Consolidation and Employment Loss," MPRA Paper 60224, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. D’Erasmo, P. & Mendoza, E.G. & Zhang, J., 2016. "What is a Sustainable Public Debt?," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & Harald Uhlig (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 2493-2597, Elsevier.
    8. Pallage, Stéphane & Scruggs, Lyle & Zimmermann, Christian, 2013. "Measuring Unemployment Insurance Generosity," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(4), pages 524-549.
    9. Honerkamp, Josef & Moog, Stefan & Raffelhüschen, Bernd, 2004. "Earlier or Later: A General Equilibrium Analysis of Bringing Forward an Already Announced Tax Reform," Discussion Papers 123, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Institut für Finanzwissenschaft.
    10. Ladislav Hájek, 2003. "Daňové zatížení v zemích OECD a v České republice [Tax burden in OECD countries and in the Czech Republic]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2003(5), pages 714-725.
    11. Jaime Alonso-Carrera & María Jesús Freire-Serén & Baltasar Manzano, 2004. "Rentabilidad social de la inversión pública española en infraestructuras," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 170(3), pages 81-103, september.
    12. Luksic, Jan, 2020. "The extensive macro labor supply elasticity: Integrating taxes and expenditures," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    13. Enrique G. Mendoza, 2001. "The International Macroeconomics of Taxation and the Case Against European Tax Harmonization," NBER Working Papers 8217, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Nicolae-Bogdan Ianc, 2025. "How do effective taxation and institutions affect FDI nowadays?," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 1-21, June.
    15. Juan Carlos Conesa & Timothy J. Kehoe & Kim J. Ruhl, 2007. "Modeling great depressions: the depression in Finland in the 1990s," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, vol. 31(Nov), pages 16-44.
    16. Moraga, Jesús Fernández-Huertas & Vidal, Jean-Pierre, 2010. "Fiscal sustainability and public debt in an endogenous growth model," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 277-302, April.
    17. Konstantinos Angelopoulos & George Economides & Pantelis Kammas, 2009. "Do political incentives matter for tax policies? Ideology, opportunism and the tax structure," Working Papers 2009_12, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    18. Röhrs, Sigrid & Winter, Christoph, 2017. "Reducing government debt in the presence of inequality," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 1-20.
    19. Hashmat U. Khan & Jean-François Rouillard, 2017. "Why Does Household Investment Lead Business Investment over the Business Cycle?: Comment," Cahiers de recherche 17-01, Departement d'économique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    20. Jan Jacobs & Jenny Ligthart & Hendrik Vrijburg, 2010. "Consumption tax competition among governments: Evidence from the United States," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 17(3), pages 271-294, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • E62 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook - - - Fiscal Policy; Modern Monetary Theory
    • H22 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Incidence
    • H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies
    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bdr:borrec:1161. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Clorith Angélica Bahos Olivera (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/brcgvco.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.